The legendary Ganga Sagar: An investigation of its structure and properties

I haven't posted in a few months :P my last post got wayyyyy tooo hectic, I couldn't keep up with it in all honesty. But now onto the Ganga Sagar

There's a reason why I opted to put this thread in the "controversies" section. But that's simply because I believe its a fraud. I know of a great deal many more Sikhs who believe it to be the real deal, and treat it as "proof" of the divine.

For all of you who don't know what it is, here's a good link that covers its history and what it is becuase I wont be going into that:

http://www.chicsikh.com/article-deta...?id=669&cat=12
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/controversies/32469-legendary-ganga-sagar-investigation-its-structure.html

Now that were all caught up to speed about it. I would love to hear your opinions on it. I'm mostly wondering if there are any sikhs who share my opinion? Cuz coming from an atheist, it wouldnt mean much to the majority of the sikh community. But again, do any of you sikhs consider it to be a fraud? If so, why? and If not... why? :P

Looking forward to the conversation.


Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

In addition to being a chronicle of a Muslim family with ancient ties to Sikhism and a part of Punjab that has immense historical significance, this is a story of reverence for many things, and not a story about a magic trick.

I have read this story before, and the humanity is what is most striking to me. This paragraph IMHO captures the core idea about the sagar that is pierced with so many holes:

In Melbourne, when someone announced at a gurdwara that "he was about to demonstrate" this to the public, Azizullah was quick to point out respectfully that "I'm not here to demonstrate or prove anything. In fact, if people are merely curious to see whether the urn retains water or not, I prefer not to show it to them, let alone pour water into the Ganga Sagar in front of them. I don't do this to satisfy people's curiosity, its just for the followers of the Guru to commune with an object that he once held in his precious hands."

I guess what I'm trying to say is more along the lines of... alright, it retains water, but do you believe it retains this water because of the fact that it is, perhaps, divinely bless by Guru Gobind Singh Ji ? Or do you believe that it retains this water because something else must be going on...
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

For example, if I brought fourth a jug, that looks like the Ganga Sagar and retains water (as he has demonstrated numerous times) but also retains milk (as some stories like to mention) and lets sand pass through its holes (something he doesn't demonstrate but is also attributed to the Ganga Sagar). If I had a seemingly identical jug with those three identical properties except the only difference between my jug and the Ganga Sagar is that you know for a fact that mine was not a divine relic... does that, in some way, throw some doubt onto the ganga sagar story? Cuz as it stands right now, the ganga sagar is unique in that its only jug in the world with said propeties.

But if someone brought fourth a jug that had all the properties of the ganga sagar. I have trouble picturing any sikh suggest that "it doesnt matter if the ganga sagar retains its water through worldly means—its about the humanity of the story." Because in my opinion, the humanity of the story takes a turn for the worst if the ganga sagar is shown to be a fraud, then its simply profiteering of a gullible public.

By the way, for the people who havent seen the demonstration of the ganga sagar in person, but have heard the stories, heres a few videos about it.


Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

This is the most recent video I could find, dated feb 2010.




Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

These last two videos are taken from the same gurdwara in 2009 but show two diff angels. the videos actually overlap at a certain point in time, see if u can catch it. :P

What do you believe, Caspian ji?

p/s The story from SikhChic has a perspective that is focused on reverence. Some people have an instinct to search for miracles. Can anyone really talk them out of it?

I know, whole-heartedly, that its a fraud (i cant stress this enough, the design of the jug is so obvious to me, that i'm surprised no one has realized this before and made countless jugs with the same properties). I'm in the process of building a "too scale" model that has those three exact properties (if anyone has scale pictures of the ganga sagar, i'd greatly appreciate it if I could get my hands on them :P)
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

The hardest part is not figuring out exactly how it works (and i know exactly how it works based on the above youtube videos) but rather making my scale model "look" like the ganga sagar. (I'm no metal smith and i only want to build it using supplies available to them in the 16-17th century).

I've made a tin-can replica at about 1/5 the size and showed it to my siblings and parents (much to their surprise because it actually works better then the original ganga-sagar). I want to go full scale and hopefully put it on youtube. But if im right about the Ganga-Sagar's design (in my youtube video I will explain indetail why and how i know its design) then only a few possibilities exist regarding its status as a reverred object

Either:

A) The muslim family has been conning the entire sikh community for the past 300 years. With a dubious story and a cleverly design jug

or

B) Guru Gobind Singh Ji tried to pass off a "not-so-sacred" jug as a "sacred" jug.

Forgive me for any offence I might have caused. But if I was to upload that video to youtube, of my replica Ganga Sagar, is it something that would peek ur interest? Or is ur faith in the "original" unshakeable? < That question goes out to anyone whos interested in the Ganga Sagar. I would love to know whether or not you guys would like to see my scale model? Or if you guys would rather pass me off as a crackpot :P

Caspian ji

I keep gently trying to steer you in a different direction as far as your comments are concerned. Trying to get you to acknowledge other possibilities in the actions of the Muslim family. Implicitly I have been asking you if perhaps the "magic trick" -- you keep returning to (not even 1/10th of the story) -- is something being promoted by people other than the Muslim family or Guru Gobind Singh. And you have been resisting!

So, yes, you are being extremely offensive. Certainly as long as you attach motivations to individuals (Muslim family, Guru Gobind Singh) o prop up a different agenda. We know there are no "sacred" relics in Sikhism which have "magical" properties. Nor does the title of the SikhChic article present the story as if that were true. SikhChic has titled the story, "Ganga Sagar: history, legend devotion." You have chosen a misleading title for this thread.

Why don't you explore your real agenda with us? If it turns out to be disrespectful you can be sure there will be protests and you will get a lot of attention. :happykaur:

My Agenda?

I feel compelled to get the sikh community to think "critically" instead of simply believing in things (like the Ganga Sagar) on the basis of blind faith alone. During my research into the ganga sagar on the internet, I came across quotes by members of a different sikh oriented websites ( like sikhnet.com or something) which I found alarming.

One member suggests:

"Lets wake up again. The vessel should absolutely not be tested to see it it will hold milk or water. The value of the tale is in its mystery. After we find out that the vessel leaks it will become just another fake. Be assured that if it has real holes in it and is not a trick vessel, it will not hold a liquid."
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

Another fellow, in response to a more critically minded sikh (who said he thought the ganga sagar was a fraud) says:

"so I suppose there is no God either since we can't see him? Not a believer in blind faith i see. I suppose Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh never even existed then either."

Its the above kind of mentality that i've focused my agenda on. I'm not accusing you of being similarily narrow minded (although the last sentance of yours combined with the emotican makes you seem rather passive agressive). But I am accusing the sikh community at large of having adopted a culture of blind-faith and ignorance. And thats why i say what I say, the sikh community needs a reality check.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

By the way this is the controversy section isnt it? I dont feel like i have grossly mistated the title of this thread considering the section I put it in. Everything i said, and even the title of this thread is up for debate. I look forward to your "protests"

Since Caspian ji you want to explore the science or lack of it in this historical vessel, and wake the Sikh quom up to the possibility of a magic trick, then the title of the thread needs to be changed.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32469

Especially since within a gurmat understanding of Sikhi there can be neither sacred relics to venerate, nor is magic taken to be spiritually meaningful.


BTW how did you survey the Sikh community scientifically in order to know what the "Sikh community at large" believes.